I thought we were discussing "a new effort to fix the immigration system on my own, without Congress." (line 8 in the original article) and similar ideas. I am very much opposed to this kind of power grab by an executive.

PDSD "Under the Obama administration we have deported far more people than in previous administrations, how is he not "enforcing the laws"??

I don't really have a dog in the numbers fight but I have seen a reference which claimed this was largely attributable to a change in how the numbers were compiled (e.g. counting turn-backs at the border as deportation or similar). I wish I could remember where I read that to go back and check.

Well, while there is a fair bit I do disagree with I think we can find some common ground. I'm not proposing sending them back to concentration camps or gulags. The high bar you describe, and that I agree with must be very high indeed and I have not seen a report that would seem to clear it. Recall that we are not obliged to shelter the populations of Darfur or Rwanda when conditions far inferior existed in those countries.

PDSD "We can't just throw them into Mexico."

Yes we can, that is how they got to us. We deport them to the closest border. We are not liable for their transportation any further. Mexico let them cross, Mexico can deal with them. Perhaps if Mexico were seeing the problems they caused by allowing transit to our border they would be disincentivized to allow it and enforce their own entry policy instead of passing the problem north.

PDSD " I think it's reasonable that if the minors have adult family members who are residing in the United States and working/paying taxes and have the means to support them and are willing to take them, that option should be explored prior to deportation."

In that case, why would we need a housing facility in Escondido? Someone is already feeding and housing them until their application can be evaluated.

I will ask again, why does this responsibility fall on us instead of their home nation or any of the nations they transited? How is it we are the ones left holding the bag without the ability to decline?

PDSD, Would you accept a situation where they are given one meal while they wait the few hours required to stamp their entry illegal and deport them? Why do we need a housing facility within a few minutes’ drive of the border?

PDSD, I'm sorry if my above post was not clear. I certainly see there being a requirement for decisive executive action, as did the founders (q.v. Federalist papers #70) however we are not suffering an invasion by a foreign power, nor are suffering a condition where the executive is under empowered to enforce the laws. Here we are suffering from an executive unwilling to enforce the laws and seeking to change them by fiat when we cannot agree on what the new law should be. Are you comfortable with the president being able to say 'I asked congress for a law, but since they couldn't agree on one I'm going to make one myself'? That scares the expletive out of me. What nationally imperiling crisis are you seeing that justifies such action?

PDSD, it was certainly planned by somebody. They are not here by accident but rather because they expect us to care for them. We are not the nannies of the world. We are being taken advantage of here. I did not cause the conditions in their home country. How is it I am liable for their care and feeding? Isn't that appeal for humanity (a term I find to be misleading by the way, perhaps you meant compassion?) you evoke more appropriately laid at the feet of those governing their home nations? Where does this end? How many people are you willing to take personal financial responsibility for?

PDSD, I know you didn't address me directly but in answer to your question I would absolutely have a problem with a conservative president ignoring laws and ruling by executive order. I believe it undermines the foundation that our government is in service to the electorate (not just those who vote for president, but those who vote for congress as well). In the case of a national emergency the president should act to secure the state. This is not an invasion, no matter what some on the right are calling it. It is a crime wave. It is a violation of LAW and needs to be stopped by executive enforcement of the LAW.

Gridlock is a safety built into the system to limit change. Imagine what our government would look like if every 4 years we elected a new monarch who reversed the policies of his predecessor. If you want this change badly enough, compromise elsewhere and reach an agreement... otherwise accept the status quo.

r145 “Please read the inscription on the Statue of Liberty”I note that Lazarus ends the poem with “I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" rather than “sneak in through the border (wink)”. There are a great many benefits to immigration but it must be done legally. Also, we generally do not rely on poetry to dictate policy.